Lineage, Life and Labors of José Rizal, Philippine Patriot
From a photograph.
Burial Record of Rizal
Facsimile from the Paco register.
Grave of Rizal in Paco Cemetery, Manila
From a photograph.
The Alcohol Lamp in which the "Farewell" Poem was Hidden
From a photograph.
The Opening Lines of Rizal's Last Verses
Facsimile of original.
Rizal's Farewell to His Mother
Facsimile.
Monument at the Corner of Rizal Avenue
From a photograph.
Float in a Rizal Day Parade
From a photograph.
W. J. Bryan as a Rizal Day Orator
From a photograph.
Governor-General Forbes and Delegate Mariano Ponce
From a photograph.
The Last Portrait of Jose Rizal's Mother
From a photograph.
Accepted Model for the Rizal Monument
From a photograph.
The Rizal Monument in Front of the New Capital
From a sketch.
The Story of the Monkey and the Tortoise
Six facsimiles from Rizal's originals.
CHAPTER I
America's Forerunner
THE lineage of a hero who made the history of his country during its
most critical period, and whose labors constitute its hope for the
future, must be more than a simple list of an ascending line. The blood
which flowed in his veins must be traced generation by generation,
the better to understand the man, but at the same time the causes
leading to the conditions of his times must be noted, step by step,
in order to give a better understanding of the environment in which
he lived and labored.
The study of the growth of free ideas is now in the days of our
democracy the most important feature of Philippine history; hitherto
this history has consisted of little more than lists of governors,
their term of office, and of the recital of such incidents as were
considered to redound to the glory of Spain, or could be so twisted
and misrepresented as to make them appear to do so. It rarely occurred
to former historians that the lamp of experience might prove a light
for the feet of future generations, and the mistakes of the past
were usually ignored or passed over, thus leaving the way open for
repeating the old errors. But profit, not pride, should be the object
of the study of the past, and our historians of today very largely
concern themselves with mistakes in policy and defects of system;
fortunately for them such critical investigation under our changed
conditions does not involve the discomfort and danger that attended
it in the days of Doctor Rizal.
In the opinion of the martyred Doctor, criticism of the right
sort--even the very best things may be abused till they become
intolerable evils--serves much the same useful warning purpose
for governments that the symptoms of sickness do for persons. Thus
government and individual alike, when advised in time of something
wrong with the system, can seek out and correct the cause before
serious consequences ensue. But the nation that represses honest
criticism with severity, like the individual who deadens his symptoms
with dangerous drugs, is likely to be lulled into a false security
that may prove fatal. Patriot toward Spain and the Philippines alike,
Rizal tried to impress this view upon the government of his day,
with fatal results to himself, and the disastrous effects of not
heeding him have since justified his position.
The very defenses of Old Manila illustrate how the Philippines have
suffered from lack of such devoted, honest and courageous critics as
Jose Rizal. The city wall was built some years later than the first
Spanish occupation to keep out Chinese pirates after Li Ma-hong
destroyed the city. The Spaniards sheltered themselves in the old
Tagalog fort till reenforcements could come from the country. No one
had ever dared to quote the proverb about locking the door after the
horse was stolen. The need for the moat, so recently filled in, was
not seen until after the bitter experience of the easy occupation of
Manila by the English, but if public opinion had been allowed free
expression this experience might have been avoided. And the free
space about the walls was cleared of buildings only after these same
buildings had helped to make the same occupation of the city easier,
yet there were many in Manila who foresaw the danger but feared to
foretell it.
Had the people of Spain been free to criticise the Spaniards' way of
waiting to do things until it is too late, that nation, at one time the
largest and richest empire in the world, would probably have been saved
from its loss of territory and its present impoverished condition. And
had the early Filipinos, to whom splendid professions and sweeping
promises were made, dared to complain of the Peninsular policy of
procrastination--the "manana" habit, as it has been called--Spain
might have been spared Doctor Rizal's terrible but true indictment
that she retarded Philippine progress, kept the Islands miserably
ruled for 333 years and in the last days of the nineteenth century was
still permitting mediaeval malpractices. Rizal did not believe that
his country was able to stand alone as a separate government. He
therefore desired to preserve the Spanish sovereignty in the
Philippines, but he desired also to bring about reforms and conditions
conducive to advancement. To this end he carefully pointed out those
colonial shortcomings that caused friction, kept up discontent, and
prevented safe progress, and that would have been perfectly easy to
correct. Directly as well as indirectly, the changes he proposed were
calculated to benefit the homeland quite as much as the Philippines,
but his well-meaning efforts brought him hatred and an undeserved
death, thus proving once more how thankless is the task of telling
unpleasant truths, no matter how necessary it may be to do so. Because
Rizal spoke out boldly, while realizing what would probably be his
fate, history holds him a hero and calls his death a martyrdom. He
was not one of those popularity-seeking, self-styled patriots who are
ever mouthing "My country, right or wrong;" his devotion was deeper
and more disinterested. When he found his country wrong he willingly
sacrificed himself to set her right. Such unselfish spirits are rare;
in life they are often misunderstood, but when time does them justice,
they come into a fame which endures.
Doctor Rizal knew that the real Spain had generous though sluggish
intentions, and noble though erratic impulses, but it awoke too late;
too late for Doctor Rizal and too late to save the Philippines for
Spain; tardy reforms after his death were useless and the loss of
her overseas possessions was the result. Doctor Rizal lost when he
staked his life on his trust in the innate sense of honor of Spain,
for that sense of honor became temporarily blinded by a sudden but
fatal gust of passion; and it took the shock of the separation to
rouse the dormant Spanish chivalry.
Still in the main Rizal's judgment was correct, and he was the victim
of mistimed, rather than of misplaced, confidence, for as soon as
the knowledge of the real Rizal became known to the Spanish people,
belated justice began to be done his memory, and then, repentant and
remorseful, as is characteristically Castilian, there was little delay
and no half-heartedness. Another name may now be grouped with Columbus
and Cervantes among those to whom Spain has given imprisonment in
life and monuments after death--chains for the man and chaplets for
his memory. In 1896, during the few days before he could be returned
to Manila, Doctor Rizal occupied a dungeon in Montjuich Castle in
Barcelona; while on his way to assist the Spanish soldiers in Cuba
who were stricken with yellow fever, he was shipped and sent back to
a prejudged trial and an unjust execution. Fifteen years later the
Catalan city authorities commemorated the semi-centennial of this
prisoner's birth by changing, in his honor, the name of a street in
the shadow of the infamous prison of Montjuich Castle to "Calle del
Doctor Rizal."
More instances of this nature are not cited since they are not
essential to the proper understanding of Rizal's story, but let it be
made clear once for all that whatever harshness may be found in the
following pages is directed solely to those who betrayed the trust
of the mother country and selfishly abused the ample and unrestrained
powers with which Spain invested them.
And what may seem the exaltation of the Anglo-Saxons at the expense of
the Latins in these pages is intended only to point out the superiority
of their ordered system of government, with its checks and balances,
its individual rights and individual duties, under which men are
"free to live by no man's leave, underneath the Law." No human being
can be safely trusted with unlimited power, and no man, no matter
what his nationality, could have withstood the temptations offered by
the chaotic conditions in the Philippines in past times any better
than did the Spaniards. There is nothing written in this book that
should convey the opinion that in similar circumstances men of any
nationality would not have acted as the Spaniards did. The easiest
recognized characteristic of absolutism, and all the abuses and
corruption it brings in its train, is fear of criticism, and Spain
drew her own indictment in the Philippines when she executed Rizal.
When any nation sets out to enroll all its scholarly critics among
the martyrs in the cause of Liberty, it makes an open confession of
guilt to all the world. For a quarter of a century Spain had been
ruling in the Philippines by terrorizing its subjects there, and
Rizal's execution, with utter disregard of the most elementary rules
of judicial procedure, was the culmination that drove the Filipinos
to desperation and arrested the attention of the whole civilized
world. It was evident that Rizal's fate might have been that of any
of his countrymen, and the thinking world saw that events had taken
such a course in the Philippines that it had become justifiable for
the Filipinos to attempt to dissolve the political bands which had
connected them with Spain for over three centuries.
Such action by the Filipinos would not have been warranted by a
solitary instance of unjust execution under stress of political
excitement that did not indicate the existence of a settled
policy. Such instances are rather to be classed among the mistakes
to which governments as well as individuals are liable. Yet even such
a mistake may be avoided by certain precautions which experience has
suggested, and the nation that disregards these precautions is justly
open to criticism.
Our present Philippine government guarantees to its citizens as
fundamental rights, that no person shall be held to answer for a
capital crime unless on an indictment, nor may he be compelled in any
criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life,
liberty or property without due process of law. The accused must have
a speedy, public and impartial trial, be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusation, be confronted with the witnesses against him,
have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and have
the assistance of counsel for his defense. Not one of these safeguards
protected Doctor Rizal except that he had an "open trial," if that name
may be given to a courtroom filled with his enemies openly clamoring
for his death without rebuke from the court. Even the presumption of
innocence till guilt was established was denied him. These precautions
have been considered necessary for every criminal trial, but the
framers of the American Constitution, fearful lest popular prejudice
some day might cause injustice to those advocating unpopular ideals,
prohibited the irremediable penalty of death upon a charge of treason
except where the testimony of two reliable witnesses established some
overt act, inference not being admissible as evidence.